I stumbled upon your channel in the search for the games of one of my potential opponents. Nice work from you in analyzing and self-reflecting on your games and thought process. I'm FIDE master with 2300+ but I play almost all the openings you play, so it was interesting to watch your games. In game one, you don't need to think half an hour to play ...Qc7, it is such a natural move for a petroff player. When I play Petroff I play the same line, and ...Qc7 comes by itself. The key is not that much in development, but in control of the key square e5. Think like this: if white can plant his knight on e5 without any problems, he is better. ...Nf6 only helps white to do that, and ...Qc7 controls important squares, especially e5. Later on you really played badly, after he planted his knight on f5 game was strategically won by him. In other games you have periods of excellent play but then got carried away by some erronous idea supported by very shallow calculation. Than, in your commentary you are putting so much time to rationalize your decision-making process which got you into trouble, usually based on some rule you didn't follow. Don't waste too much time on following rules, watch for concrete features in each position. Think about famous Anton Chigurh's line from No Country for Old Men: "If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?" 🙂 Use rules only as a guidlines, you need to spot important features in the position, placements of pieces, tactical ideas and so on. Keep up the good work and continue to be critical to yourself, analysing your own games is the best way to improvement. I'm doing it all the time with my own games!
Regarding Game 6, after e4e5 Nf3Nf6 Nc3Nc6 a3Bc5, white can play Nxe5 and after Nxe5 he can win the piece back with d4. Computer says +0,7 so it´s not decisive but it is a little advantage for white. You might want to check this line out if you want to play Bc5.
I'll add that the idea of a6 is to play Ba7 in one of the following moves so d4 doesn't come with a tempo. It has been played more than 3000 times in the lichess master database. Obviously the opponent didn't understand the purpose of it, so here it was a wasted move
It was well known since game between Karpov and Kortchnoi from 1981. Back than, it was considered smart way to improve on the more common 5...d6 because at that time white players have usually opted for a plan with expansion on the queenside with a4-b4. After 5...a6 6.b4 Ba7 black basically immediatelly got a better position for his bishop than after more common 5...d6 6.b4 b6 7.a4 a6 8.a5 Ba7. And also black keeps option of playing ...d5 in one move, or retreating his bishop even to e7 (useful after let's say Bg5). Nowdays it is just one of the ways to go into the Italian tabya because majority of white players play a4-Re1-Nbd2 anyway or more classical Nb3-Re1-Nbd2, so it has low independent value anyway. So, not at all a bad move. Luka was in the next game also bashing 4.a3 in the four knights, but is's also actually a smart move played by many grandmasters. Even 4.a4 is not that bad, Carlsen played it once and won🙂 He should also check this line: 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 a6!? 4.cxd5 exd5 5.Nf3 h6 !?!? and count the number of Grandmasters that played this with black pieces in the last couple of years. After that he will stop calling a3/h3/...a6/...h6 weak moves :-)
Also, the good training method is to set up the position in which you had your peak advantage, and then play it against a strong computer engine. And then play it over and over again until you figure out how to win it. Many coaches recommend this approach.
I stumbled upon your channel in the search for the games of one of my potential opponents.
Nice work from you in analyzing and self-reflecting on your games and thought process. I'm FIDE master with 2300+ but I play almost all the openings you play, so it was interesting to watch your games.
In game one, you don't need to think half an hour to play ...Qc7, it is such a natural move for a petroff player. When I play Petroff I play the same line, and ...Qc7 comes by itself. The key is not that much in development, but in control of the key square e5. Think like this: if white can plant his knight on e5 without any problems, he is better. ...Nf6 only helps white to do that, and ...Qc7 controls important squares, especially e5. Later on you really played badly, after he planted his knight on f5 game was strategically won by him.
In other games you have periods of excellent play but then got carried away by some erronous idea supported by very shallow calculation. Than, in your commentary you are putting so much time to rationalize your decision-making process which got you into trouble, usually based on some rule you didn't follow. Don't waste too much time on following rules, watch for concrete features in each position. Think about famous Anton Chigurh's line from No Country for Old Men: "If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?" 🙂 Use rules only as a guidlines, you need to spot important features in the position, placements of pieces, tactical ideas and so on.
Keep up the good work and continue to be critical to yourself, analysing your own games is the best way to improvement. I'm doing it all the time with my own games!
Regarding Game 6, after e4e5 Nf3Nf6 Nc3Nc6 a3Bc5, white can play Nxe5 and after Nxe5 he can win the piece back with d4. Computer says +0,7 so it´s not decisive but it is a little advantage for white. You might want to check this line out if you want to play Bc5.
a6 in game 5 is a recommendation by GM Jan Gustafsson, no mistake whatsoever by your opponent (yet)
I'll add that the idea of a6 is to play Ba7 in one of the following moves so d4 doesn't come with a tempo. It has been played more than 3000 times in the lichess master database. Obviously the opponent didn't understand the purpose of it, so here it was a wasted move
Thanks, I didn't know that. But on the other hand, what's good for GM Gustafsson is not neccessary good for 1400's amateur ;)
It was well known since game between Karpov and Kortchnoi from 1981. Back than, it was considered smart way to improve on the more common 5...d6 because at that time white players have usually opted for a plan with expansion on the queenside with a4-b4. After 5...a6 6.b4 Ba7 black basically immediatelly got a better position for his bishop than after more common 5...d6 6.b4 b6 7.a4 a6 8.a5 Ba7. And also black keeps option of playing ...d5 in one move, or retreating his bishop even to e7 (useful after let's say Bg5).
Nowdays it is just one of the ways to go into the Italian tabya because majority of white players play a4-Re1-Nbd2 anyway or more classical Nb3-Re1-Nbd2, so it has low independent value anyway.
So, not at all a bad move. Luka was in the next game also bashing 4.a3 in the four knights, but is's also actually a smart move played by many grandmasters. Even 4.a4 is not that bad, Carlsen played it once and won🙂
He should also check this line: 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 a6!? 4.cxd5 exd5 5.Nf3 h6 !?!? and count the number of Grandmasters that played this with black pieces in the last couple of years. After that he will stop calling a3/h3/...a6/...h6 weak moves :-)
Thanks for sharing this Luca. It must have been painful to repeatedly see that you had a good position and then could not convert.
Well yes, but I hope I will for once learn something from it :)
I am a lower rated player than you. I often have a 3-4 computer advantage but fail to convert. I don't know what to do about it.
The best advice here is that of GM Ben Finegold: "You get good in chess by not giving up." So, keep playing and hope for the best :)
Also, the good training method is to set up the position in which you had your peak advantage, and then play it against a strong computer engine. And then play it over and over again until you figure out how to win it. Many coaches recommend this approach.